Fact Check: Obama 30 minute ad.

[Dirt]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_on_el_ge/fact_check_obama_ad

I'm pretty disappointed about the health care stuff. Doesn't look like we'll be getting Universal Health Care in an Obama Administration.

[Tim James]

I'd like to know how removing troops from Iraq is a spending cut if he then immediately ships them to Afghanistan and increases overall troop levels in the military branches.

[Jason McCullough]

Obama is planning on shipping every soldier in Iraq to Afghanistan? Wha?

[Tim James]

Sorry, I don't keep up with this. I thought he said that America should refocus on that country. Of course it's hyperbole to say every soldier will move over there, but I'm still curious about the numbers in terms of savings, only because my guess is it won't be much (though every bit helps!)

[Charles]

Given the fact that there are already other countries operating in Afghanistan, the US wouldn't be going it alone, which would be a help right off the bat. Multilateral operations ftw.

[Angie Gallant]

I'm not going to claim to be an expert here, so I may have some of these facts wrong, but this is what I remember from listening to Obama speak on his plans for Iraq and Afghanistan. He wants to do a staged withdrawal from Iraq. As we lower troop levels in Iraq he wants to send two battalions to Afghanistan. Then he wants to get to the point where we are no longer stop-lossing soldiers who have done their time out in the field. From my understanding, that means increasing recruitment because there are a lot of soldiers who have spent more time than they should have in a war zone.

I don't know what any of this means in money terms, obviously. But I believe cutting funding to mercenaries and contractors is part of that plan.

[Ben Sones]

I'm pretty disappointed about the health care stuff.

Is there a special prize for the 1000th thread that you start about how you are disappointed in Obama because of [insert reason of the day]? Because man, you're close!

[Linoleum]

I don't know what any of this means in money terms, obviously. But I believe cutting funding to mercenaries and contractors is part of that plan.

You can reduce contractor headcount if you are also reducing troop headcount. The nature of the post Cold War military is logistics functions have been outsourced.

The reality is, his numbers don't have to make sense (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/29/eveningnews/realitycheck/main4557520.shtml?tag=topHome;topStories). The question will be, who is he going to make most unhappy once he takes office?

[Charles]

I'm pretty disappointed about the health care stuff. Doesn't look like we'll be getting Universal Health Care in an Obama Administration.

Even during the primaries he wasn't really pushing universal healthcare. I don't know why you are disappointed. We know you are upset that hillary didn't get nominated but seriously, try grasping at something other than straws at this point.

[Tim James]

Thanks Angie. I guess two battalions isn't much, and stop-loss avoidance is certainly worth paying for. I just saw -X in Iraq + Y in Afghanistan = Z "savings" for all these other programs and my alarms went off a bit. :) Ron Paul had the same problem when he suggested that shutting down all the foreign bases with troops stationed there would be enough to eliminate the US income tax. On the right track, but the numbers don't always work.

We'll see in 2 or 3 years, I guess!

[Linoleum]

Given the fact that there are already other countries operating in Afghanistan, the US wouldn't be going it alone, which would be a help right off the bat. Multilateral operations ftw.

The downside is, the more international participation, the greater transport and logistical support the US has to provide.

[Dirt]

Is there a special prize for the 1000th thread that you start about how you are disappointed in Obama because of [insert reason of the day]? Because man, you're close!

Pardon me for believing strongly in an issue that effects every single life in the United States.

[Ben Sones]

Not bad! Pretty good mock sincerity, and the dash of indignation is a nice touch. But I don't think you get points for posting again in the same thread. Go out there and start more new ones! Time's running out!

[Soapyfrog]

I beleive the military commanders in Afghanistan are asking for 20,000 additional troops. Not all of these need be American, but even if they were this is just a fraction of what is being employed in Iraq.

[Dirt]

Not bad! Pretty good mock sincerity, and the dash of indignation is a nice touch. But I don't think you get points for posting again in the same thread. Go out there and start more new ones! Time's running out!

Ben, Ben, Ben, Ben. You are a crappy troll.

[Kool Moe Dee]

Ben, Ben, Ben, Ben. You are a crappy troll.

I am shocked, yes sir, shocked, that you would level such an accusation.

[extarbags]

I am shocked, yes sir, shocked, that you would level such an accusation.

If anyone is in a position to critique somebody else's trolling technique, it's Dirt.

[Tim James]

I beleive the military commanders in Afghanistan are asking for 20,000 additional troops. Not all of these need be American, but even if they were this is just a fraction of what is being employed in Iraq.I wonder if the military commanders ask for that number to stay in Iraq if he will go with that as well.

[MarchHare]

If anyone is in a position to critique somebody else's trolling technique, it's Dirt.

Dirt is this forum's most respected troll, by far.

[Robert Sharp]

If you support universal healthcare, Obama is clearly better on this issue than McCain. Disappointment is fine, but it doesn't affect voting in this case, does it? Or does it help other issues balance things out in McCain's favor, dirt? Or is it just a statement that you wish Obama would do more?

[Charles]

If anyone is in a position to critique somebody else's trolling technique, it's Dirt.

You aren't a successful troll if people can tell you are a troll.

Me, I'm a successful troll.

[TheTrunkDr]

You aren't a successful troll if people can tell you are a troll.

Me, I'm a successful troll.
Psst. I think they might be on to you...

[NoWayJose]

If you support universal healthcare, Obama is clearly better on this issue than McCain. Disappointment is fine, but it doesn't affect voting in this case, does it? Or does it help other issues balance things out in McCain's favor, dirt? Or is it just a statement that you wish Obama would do more?
I wish Obama would do more, and I wish he would be as determined as Clinton was to balance the budget. I'm not disappointed, because those are just wishes.

Also, I don't think Dirt is even implying he won't vote for Obama. It's okay to be less than enchanted with a candidate's proposals and still vote for him.

[Adam B]

So our more financially conservative-leaning posters aren't feeling the whole "deficit spending to somewhat mitigate the recession" approach?

Because fucked if I can tell how you're going to cut taxes any further (that being the other end of trying to use gov't policy to shore up a shitty economy).

[NoWayJose]

Tax more, spend less.

[extarbags]

You aren't a successful troll if people can tell you are a troll.


I disagree. The test of a truly brilliant troll is being able to troll people even after you've been fully outed. Dirt is widely recognized as a troll, yet he pulls it off multiple times every single day. That's talent.

[Adam B]

Tax more, spend less.

Right now, as our financial markets are very slowly trying to maybe edge toward unfucking themselves? Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a great way to deepen the recession and make everything worse than it already is.

I'm all for balanced budgets and all, but right now it seems to be the like 10th thing down the list for the federal gov't to worry about.

[Robert Sharp]

I wish Obama would do more, and I wish he would be as determined as Clinton was to balance the budget. I'm not disappointed, because those are just wishes.

Also, I don't think Dirt is even implying he won't vote for Obama. It's okay to be less than enchanted with a candidate's proposals and still vote for him.

Yes, I know that's OK. That's why I'm voting for Obama despite disagreeing with him on a number of issues. I was just asking why Dirt was bringing this up.

[StGabe]

That's a pretty poorly written article. It has some good points but a lot of it is just counter-spin. Basically there are 4 "fact checks".

#1 -- Obama's claimed reduction in premiums isn't a hard number but just an estimate which is contentious. Ok, good point.

#2 -- Obama claims that he wants everyone to get affordable health care, not universal care. Not sure why anyone would have thought otherwise, universal healthcare is still a ways out unfortunately. This isn't a fact check.

#3 -- Quibbles a bit. Matching spending with cuts, doesn't mean that the debt won't continue to increase given that we're already running a deficit. Other than, it's a fair point.

#4 -- Obama talks about cutting taxes for the middle class and increasing them at the high end. The article ignores this and continues harping on the deficit. Not a fact check.

Basically while I think there are some fair points there: fixing our healthcare system will probably take more than either Obama or McCain are proposing and neither has a tax/spending plan which will start to eat at our national debt. However the article is itself guilty of a lot of spin and frequently fails to offer the "fact checks" it purports to be about.

[Jason McMaster]

You aren't a successful troll if people can tell you are a troll.

Me, I'm a successful troll.

We should team up. Become a trolling superteam

[Andrew Mayer]

What's amusing about Dirt is that he harps on everyone else for thinking Obama is perfect, but he seems to be the most severely disappointed person on the board when he discovers any perceived flaw.

[Marged]

What's amusing about Dirt is that he harps on everyone else for thinking Obama is perfect, but he seems to be the most severely disappointed person on the board when he discovers any perceived flaw.

Oh, I've been TRYING to put my finger on it! This is exactly it! Thank you!

[Dirt]

What's amusing about Dirt is that he harps on everyone else for thinking Obama is perfect, but he seems to be the most severely disappointed person on the board when he discovers any perceived flaw.

The disappointment comes from the pass that most everyone gives Obama. It hearkens to first term Dubya after 9/11. Many people on all sides of the political spectrum could see Bush do no wrong. Whatever decision Bush made was the right one. There was only a small, vocal, obstructionist, unpatriotic minority that was bashed into silence. That kind of blind faith led us into Iraq. That scares me.

[Balsamic]

I'm all for balanced budgets and all, but right now it seems to be the like 10th thing down the list for the federal gov't to worry about.

It depends on who you raise the taxes on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression#Causes

The section on income inequality is poignant and also very reminiscent of what's happening today. I'm no economist but it seems like another great compression might help things. Raising the top-bracket tax rate to pay for some massive government spending (on infrastructure and education preferably) seems like a plausible way of narrowing the income gap and putting more wealth into the hands of middle-class consumers who are more likely to spend it.

This is essentially how we got out of the great depression, raising top-bracket tax rates well over 80% and initiating massive government spending on the second world war.

Normally I'd say such a thing seems a bit unfair, but depending on how deep this rabbit hole goes that may be where we end up going.

[Andrew Mayer]

The disappointment comes from the pass that most everyone gives Obama. It hearkens to first term Dubya after 9/11. Many people on all sides of the political spectrum could see Bush do no wrong. Whatever decision Bush made was the right one. There was only a small, vocal, obstructionist, unpatriotic minority that was bashed into silence. That kind of blind faith led us into Iraq. That scares me.

You'll be happy to know that I didn't trust Bush on 9-12-2001.

Honestly, it's not that hard to judge effective people: Choose your goals before you're in the situation, remain flexible within the situation, judge your results by an external metric.

It's the ideological "make the results match the question" bullshit that steers us wrong every time. Ultimately the ideology is less important if you're willing to change your methodology to achieve the results.

If you want we can have a "What do we specifically want from an Obama presidency?" topic after he wins.

[Dirt]

You'll be happy to know that I didn't trust Bush on 9-12-2001.

Yes, many people on Qt3 were the same.

Honestly, it's not that hard to judge effective people: Choose your goals before you're in the situation, remain flexible within the situation, judge your results by an external metric.

Being effective doesn't mean that a person will do the right thing.

It's the ideological "make the results match the question" bullshit that steers us wrong every time. Ultimately the ideology is less important if you're willing to change your methodology to achieve the results.

I'd rather a President adheres to and achieves goals they state they will strive to obtain. To do what they say they will do. Changing the methodology to achieve the results is exactly what the Bush Administration did after 9/11. They used and changed their methodology until they got Congress to vote for the War in Iraq.

If you want we can have a "What do we specifically want from an Obama presidency?" topic after he wins.

That's a question that should be seriously asked before he get's elected.

[Phil_Stein]

This is essentially how we got out of the great depression, raising top-bracket tax rates well over 80% and initiating massive government spending on the second world war.

That's an interesting viewpoint - 80% tax brackets got us out of the Depression?

Could you expand a bit on this and perhaps cite some economists who agree with that position?

[Tim James]

That's a pretty poorly written article. It has some good points but a lot of it is just counter-spin. Basically there are 4 "fact checks".Yeah I don't know why they call it a fact check. Probably because it seems to be the popular type of article these days. They could call it "skeptical focus" but no one would click.

[Lum]

So our more financially conservative-leaning posters aren't feeling the whole "deficit spending to somewhat mitigate the recession" approach?

I think it's a regrettable necessity at this point given that the alternative is probably a depression.

[Balsamic]

That's an interesting viewpoint - 80% tax brackets got us out of the Depression?

Could you expand a bit on this and perhaps cite some economists who agree with that position?

Actually I said reducing income inequality did it. High top-bracket taxes and massive government spending was the method.

If you'd click the link I provided you'd see that Marriner S. Eccles argued that income inequality was a driving cause of the Great Depression. My use of the term "Great Compression" should have sent you looking in the direction of Claudia Goldin, Lawrence Katz and Robert Margo, who wrote about what lead to the massive decrease in income inequality in the United States in the 1940's, and how it helped us out of the depression.

I'm not an expert and I've only ever read summaries of these arguments. Feel free to educate me, I like learning new things.